site banner
PaperclipPerfector  4mo ago (text post)   29410 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 16, 2024

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Canada's finance minister quits over Trump tariff dispute with Trudeau

Canada's Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland has resigned from her post, citing disagreements with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on how to respond to incoming President Donald Trump's threat of tariffs. In her publicly-shared resignation letter, Freeland said Canada needs to keep its "fiscal powder dry" to deal with the threat of sweeping tariffs from US President-elect Donald Trump.

She added this means "eschewing costly political gimmicks" that Canada cannot afford. Trump has promised to impose a levy of 25% on imported Canadian goods, which economists have warned would significantly hurt Canada's economy. Referencing the tariffs, Freeland called them a "threat" that needs to be taken "extremely seriously".

She and Trudeau were reportedly also in disagreement over a series of recently-proposed policies by the prime minister designed to address the country's cost-of-living crisis. Among them is a cheque of C$250 that the government wanted to send to every Canadian earning less than C$150,000 annually. These cheques were expected to cost the federal government a total of C$4.68bn. Another is a temporary tax break on essential items during the holidays which is anticipated to cost C$1.6bn in lost tax revenue. Freeland's office had reportedly been concerned about the price of these two policies, saying they are economically unwise at a time when the country's deficit is growing.

Seems like Trudeau is floundering for some ways to keep his job and his head economist didn't approve. I'm not sure why Trump wants to mega tax Canada but it certainly can't have helped. This may end up bringing down the Trudeau government.

I wonder to what extent Trump's win will inspire regime change in western Allies.

The panic in Canada, Mexico, and Europe over Trump's tariff proposals has revealed how weak these countries are in relation to the U.S. It's basically a meme at this point. "While you were relaxing in cafes and expanding pension benefits, we were mastering the blade LLM. And now you have the audacity to come to US for help!?"

Why should the Trump administration open U.S. markets to regimes who fought his election, in some cases quite directly?

They backed the wrong horse, and now its time to pay the piper. Trump's tariff threats are pretty savvy, and I think he will be able to extract valuable concessions on migration and defense. But better yet would be if these countries join the movement themselves, align their policies with the (IMO more forward thinking) American policies, and get better treatment as a result.

the movement

What movement? Trump heads no movement (no global one anyway), he has no ideology other than narcissism and vague sentimentalism about the past. He has no coherent ideal or theory about how the world system ought to work in the way that Wilson, FDR, H.W. Bush or Churchill did, certainly none that can be reconciled with his actions - or inaction - as President first time round.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats